Harper's Weekly was
the most read newspaper of the Civil War era. To help you develop a
better understanding of the War, we have posted our complete collection
of the paper to this WEB site. We are hopeful that you find this
resource useful in your research and study.

(Scroll Down to See Entire Page, or Newspaper Thumbnails below will take you to the page of interest)

HARPER'S WEEKLY.

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 1863.

THE
ANGLO-REBEL IRON-CLADS.

WE were months ago forewarned
that several powerful iron-clad steamers were building in Great Britain for the
rebels. There was every antecedent reason for believing the statement. There is
nothing which English manufacturers will not make and English merchants will not
sell for money. The obscene idols of the Hindoos are a regular article of
manufacture in Birmingham, and if a new car of Juggernaut were wanted it would
be got up in Liverpool—for a consideration—on the shortest notice. The
cotton-loan, so confidingly taken by British capitalists, placed a large amount
of funds in the hands of the rebel agents, and every body knew precisely for
what purposes these were to be used. We are now assured upon competent authority
that three of these vessels are nearly ready for sea. One of them was a
fortnight ago in the Graving Dock at Liverpool, fully plated, with almost all of
her machinery on board; another had just been launched at Birkenhead, and a
third at Glasgow. It was a matter of perfect notoriety for what service these
were designed, yet no step was taken to interfere with their construction; and
there is not the slightest reason to suppose that any practical obstacle will be
thrown in the way of their sailing. Iron-plated and furnished with gun-turrets
and rams, as they are, the British Government will have no means of knowing that
they are intended for vessels of war; they may be designed for commerce. Or, if
they are vessels of war, they may have been built for the King of Dahomey, the
Viceroy of Egypt, the Duke of Saxe-Coburg, or any other peaceful potentate:
certainly not, "as far as Government has any official information," for the
so-called Confederate States. Or, even if built for the purpose of making war
upon the United States, it is very doubtful whether Her Majesty's Government
could interfere with the lawful business of her subjects: and surely the
building of ships

is a very lawful business. We
have nothing to look for from the good faith of the British Government.

When the enterprise was
undertaken, it was supposed that these vessels could inflict damage upon us
compared with which that inflicted by the
Alabama and the
Florida are nothing. Our blockading fleets
could be destroyed, and our great cities laid in ashes. There was nothing, it
was said, which could prevent one of these vessels from steaming in broad
daylight into the harbor of New York, and repeating upon a larger scale the
exploits of the
Merrimac in Hampton Roads. And so far as our
fortifications is concerned this is perfectly true. But recent events have shown
that we have at our disposal means of rendering our harbors perfectly secure
from attack from these vessels. That protection is to be found in our "Monitors."
Put to a service for which they were never designed, the severity of the trial
to which they have been exposed has demonstrated their perfect availability for
harbor defense. The vessels which bore almost unharmed the fire of the hundreds
of guns of the Charleston forts can bid defiance to the fire of any vessel that
floats. The guns whose first shot disabled the Atlanta may be relied upon for
doing a like service to any other vessel, under the far more favorable
circumstances in which they will be brought into play.

The harbor of New York can not be
entered except through channel of less than one-third of a mile in width. To
pass a single Monitor quietly moored in mid-channel a hostile vessel must sail,
broadside on, within an eighth of a mile from the muzzles of those terrible guns
looking grimly out from that almost intangible and wholly invulnerable tower.
The Monitor itself would need no manoeuvring. She might lie at rest, the
revolution of the tower always keeping her guns trained upon the enemy. Or if by
miracle the enemy should pass her, she would hoist anchor and steam alongside of
her antagonist, delivering her fire against her broadsides. Long before the
enemy could pass the miles between the Narrows and the city she would lie a mass
of harmless iron on the bottom of the harbor.

In building so many Monitors, and
arming them with such heavy ordnance, our Government was working wiser than it
knew. It will be only when they shall have prevented or repelled an attack upon
our commercial metropolis that we shall appreciate the true significance of
Timby's revolving turrets, Ericsson's raft-like hulls, and Dahlgren's heavy
guns, combined into one harmonious whole. The wise Greek saw that the true
protection of Athens lay in her "wooden walls." The true defense of our city
lies in our iron walls. The month of September is the time fixed upon for the
departure of the rebel iron-clads from the British ports. We trust that long
before they can threaten us a sufficient number of the Monitors will be released
from their present work in the South to enable our Government to station several
of them in each of our great harbors.

The true peril to us from the
rebel iron-clads lies not in the danger of an attack upon our cities, but in
their power of destroying our blockading fleet. To obviate this the two or three
ports yet in the hands of the rebels must be captured. This done the blockaders
may be withdrawn until we can have disposed of the vessels with which our
British friends have so inopportunely furnished our enemies. From present
appearances we may infer that they will not "see their way" to add to these
favors. Meanwhile we owe them something, which we shall most likely be able to
pay in due time. The "common barrator" of nations will be untrue to all her
historical antecedents if she remains long without a European war on her hands.
And then we shall remember some things which she would like us to forget.

A
RETROSPECT.

THE correspondence between many
persons in the Free States and Jefferson Davis, before the rebellion, is a most
valuable addition to the interior history of the war. It is another link in the
chain of evidence that the rebel leaders believed the sentiment of patriotism
and loyalty to law to be so utterly destroyed that they could easily take
possession of the Government upon their own terms. The plan was for the Slave
States to withdraw—to leave chaos behind, and compel the North, torn by domestic
strife, to crave admission into the new confederacy. Then, as Mr. Hunter
remarked, New England could be left out altogether, or admitted as a single
State.

It was in this view that certain
papers recommended the Montgomery Constitution as superior to that of 1787. It
was with this intention that private meetings were held in the city of New York,
among those who are now notorious Copperheads, to secure the co-operation of the
"conservatism" of the North with the "secessionism" of the South, knowing, as
they knew very well, that "abolitionism" could not be counted upon for
deliberate treason. It was this conviction which explains the equanimity of the
gentlemen of property who hastened to take possession of Mr. Russell upon his
arrival in this country, and told him that the revolution was virtually
accomplished. It was this that explains such letters as that written by Mr.
Barlow, of New York, to a slave Senator, during the

secession movement, warning him
against any overt attack upon the Government. The feeling which inspired such
letters governed Jeff Davis in refusing to seize Washington when it was at the
mercy of five hundred men. The confident expectation of all these persons and
correspondents of Davis, who are now either rebels or Copperheads, was that the
Government of the United States would tumble down as that of Louis Philippe did
in France, and that an immediate reconstruction would follow, upon conditions to
be dictated by the Seceders and ratified by the "Conservatives," in which class
were included all Democrats of every hue, the conservative Republicans, and the
mass of timid citizens, who were held to be the vast majority in a community of
traders.

The tacit collusion with Davis
and his confederates of those gentlemen in the city of New York who are now
notorious Copperheads has been long in evidence. That of similar persons in
other parts of the country is now proved by the correspondence which Davis is
either so weak or so wily a conspirator as not to have destroyed. And it is not
surprising that he believed his task would be both rapidly and easily
accomplished. He and his confederates had labored long and hard to corrupt the
conscience and common sense of the country, and they had every reason to suppose
that they had the proof of general assent to national dishonor and ruin. That
history and human nature should not have warned them to beware is again not
surprising, for among the leading rebels and Copperheads there is not a single
man of great intellectual grasp or moral perception. Mr. Douglas, who was
unquestionably the ablest man of their political fraternity, saw from the
beginning the hopelessness of their plot, or he would have been at the head of
it. The desertion of a leader like Douglas for leaders like Davis, Wood,
Toombs,
Vallandigham, and
Slidell, was a fatal error for any party which
aimed at peaceful subversion of the Government. But it is not surprising that
these men did not see it. They believed only in political chicane. They scorned
principle. They repudiated all ideas except that men would under all
circumstances be governed by a selfish desire of quiet; and they were very sure
that the mass of people at the North hated something which rebels called then,
and Copperheads call now, Abolitionism, more than they loved their country or
its government. Like all boastfully "practical men" they omitted common sense in
their calculations. They saw trade, corruption, servility, and craven fear, but
they did not see human nature. With the correspondent in Michigan they thought
the "surmon" of the Reverend Van Dyke, of Brooklyn, a marvelous production, but
the writing on the human heart and conscience was nonsensical scribbling.

Let Davis and his friends learn
the lesson which this correspondence teaches. They have found that the
Copperheads did not then represent the spirit and intention of the people. They
do not represent them now. They are the desperate, wrecked, struggling men who
would willingly capsize the boat. But let Davis remember that they are
overboard.

THE
FABLE OF THE BATS.

WE had not heard of our
"Conservative" friends since they elected
Mr. Seymour last autumn until the riots in New
York, during which a merchant wrote to a friend in another city: "The
Conservatives have had the upper hand here for a day or two, but we hope to have
them under by to-morrow night." It was a strictly correct statement, because, of
course, every man among the rioters who voted last autumn voted for the
"Conservative" ticket; and if the mob had been polled at the moment of
destroying the Orphan Asylum it would have declared itself unanimously for the
"Conservative" platform.

Suppressed in New York
"Conservatism" has raised its head in Rochester, and proposes to arrange for the
next Presidential election. Its resolutions set forth by declaring its total
want of sympathy with "secession, abolitionism, or nativism of any kind."
General Leslie Coombs, whose name is not conspicuous for unconditional
patriotism, is reported to have manipulated and "modified" the resolutions.
Probably General Leslie Coombs and his "Conservative" friends, who were ardent
supporters of the eminent patriot, and enforcer-of-the-laws, John Bell, at the
last election, propose to furnish another candidate of the same kind of
"fidelity to the Government" as Mr. Bell. Our "Conservative" friends, who eschew
"secession and abolitionism," have possibly forgotten a little fable of which we
beg respectfully to remind them.

A company of bats once found
themselves in broad daylight in disagreeable proximity to two whirring
millstones grinding corn. "What a confounded clatter!" cried they. "Why don't
the stones stop and let us have some peace? We want to be quiet." But the stones
whirred as noisily as ever. The poor bats, bumping and fluttering wildly between
them, at last cried in chorus, "We wish it to be understood that we are not
responsible for this din. We declare to all the world that we have, have had,
and will have nothing whatever to do with either of these stones, and we protest
against such great, loud, gritty things." But while they were still crying and
fluttering they fell against the inexorable stones and were ground to powder in
an instant. "Poor little bats," said the eagle who had overheard them, "they did
not know that it is only by the whirring of millstones that corn is ground into
food."

THE
CONSCRIPTION.

THERE is a way of speaking of the
Conscription Act as if it were something monstrous and tyrannical. This strain
was a favorite one in Mr. Fernando Wood's rhetoric before he came to the wise
conclusion that if there were to be a war it must be conducted upon warlike
principles. But a very few words will show exactly the character and intent of
the act.

The nation is engaged in a
tremendous struggle

to save its life. The struggle
can be maintained in one way only, namely by armies. In the salvation of the
country and Government every citizen is equally interested, and the duty of each
is the same. Upon all sides the Government hears and has heard, with few
exceptions, the expression of the most unswerving devotion and the strongest
resolution to subdue the rebellion by arms. It therefore says to the loyal
people of the country: "We hear you, and we believe you. We take you at your
word, and we will arrange a plan by which every man can give his personal aid in
securing victory. All fighting men shall be enrolled and held subject to active
duty, with such exceptions as careful and humane consideration may prescribe."

That is the spirit of the
Conscription Act. It assumes that the people are willing to save themselves at
any cost and risk. If Congress had not believed that, and therefore assumed it,
it should have frankly confessed that we were conquered, and have proposed
submission to the victors. But not believing that we were conquered it would not
say so. If Congress were mistaken, the mistake will appear in resistance to the
conscription. If we are conquered, our defeat will be shown by refusal to obey
the call of necessity and duty. But if we are resolved that civil order, a just
government, and a great nation shall be preserved, every man will gladly go and
do wherever and whatever the lawful authorities may require.

GENERAL DIX.

THE address of
General Dix upon occasion of the draft in the
city of New York is worthy of the man who, as Secretary of the Treasury, ordered
the man who pulled down the United States flag to be shot upon the spot. Its
calm and judicious exposition both of the particular facts and of the general
principle of the draft make it a document to be preserved and pondered. The law,
he says, under which the
draft is made is founded on the principle that
every citizen who enjoys the protection of the Government may be summoned in
seasons of great public danger to take up arms for the common defense. No
political society can exist unless this principle is acknowledged, and there is
no civilized country in which it is not recognized. The permission to furnish a
substitute or to purchase exemption is designed to provide for cases of
hardship, and if either provision were stricken out those cases would be
multiplied.

In regard to
riots General Dix says most truly, that the
only security of those who have little more than life and the labor of their own
hands to protect lies in the supremacy of the law. And this truth applies
especially to us, for our Government is the will of the people. In countries
where the law is the will of one man, or of one class, it is conceivable that it
may come to bear so unjustly upon other classes as to leave them sometimes no
hope of redress but in forcible resistance. But that can not be the case with
us.

General Dix's record in this war
has been most honorable. His course has been quiet, consistent, and firm. His
experience in Baltimore has taught him the subterfuges of the Northern allies of
the rebellion, and revealed to him the radical nature of the contest. His
appointment to the Department of the East was conclusive evidence of the
discretion and determination of the Government.

STATE RIGHTS.

THERE is a plausible objection
made to emancipation as a necessary result of the war, upon the ground that
slavery is a State institution, and to destroy it by the national will is to
invade the rights of States, which nobody wishes to see overthrown.

But, without urging the right of
any imperiled people to suspend any law and every right for the sake of the
common safety, it is plain that such emancipation does not limit any State
right, except in declaring that no State can be allowed to maintain any system
which constantly menaces the national peace. There can be no right to hold
slaves, whatever the State law may be, any more than there can be any right to
put insane persons to death, although the State law might allow it. The power of
a majority to declare that any thing may be done, and to do it, may be
undeniable; but no power can beget the right to do wrong. The corroding vice of
Douglas's famous squatter-sovereignty dogma was that it empowered brute force
and the vote of a majority to dispose of natural rights, which are inalienable.

Slavery is a wrong recognized and
sustained by State law. Its necessary development presently brings the whole
nation into mortal danger. Now, omitting altogether the constitutional right to
destroy it as a measure of public safety, a nation which had succeeded in
suppressing the rebellion and averting the danger might obviously do whatever
was necessary to avoid a recurrence of precisely the same peril. Nor could any
State complain of its injured rights. No State can have a right to threaten the
nation. A man upon a steamer may have matches in his state-room and keep a light
burning, and his room is his castle; but he has no right to stow a keg of
gunpowder under his berth. Now that we have practically discovered that slavery
is gunpowder, we shall be guilty of suicide if we permit ourselves to be blown
up.

TO
THE BITTER END.

WHEN the war began we certainly
did our share of boasting. But the rebels are better Gascons than we. We reduced
our adjectives when we found that the task was stubborn. But the rebel rhetoric
rises with disaster. Just now, when the prospect of the rebellion is not
promising, the celebrated last ditch is incessantly brought forward. "Let Sumter
fall," cry the rebel papers—"Charleston
shall be defended street by street, and house by house, and at last it shall be
blown up, and the invader welcomed to smoking ruins." If it should be it would
be one of those catastrophes to which (Next
Page)

Site Copyright 2003-2013 Son of the
South. For Questions or comments about this collection,
contact paul@sonofthesouth.net